fromageGB

Yep, usually is sheer bad luck when I fail to a win single matchpoint! But if someone persuaded me to have a go at acol I would open (1) 1♦ and (2) 1NT.

I've always played 1♠ as fewer than 5 spades, 1NT = 5+ spades. Certainly before I'd heard of fantunes, and my one openings are not forcing. It is advantageous to be able to describe or deny 5 spades in one go, or 6 in two goes - see above - and that is sufficient reason for me. You do need a way of finding a 4-4 spade fit, if that is your objection to it, but this can be done. (Edit - posted at the same time as PhantomSac's, but my typing is slower !)

Definitely bid 1NT. You can always bid or pass 2♥ next time round. I play a Gazzilli, and the sequence 1♥ (p) 2♠ is the 13+ 4 card support bid (J2N type) as we play it. All spade bids in reply to a 1♥ are not natural, with 1♠ = "forcing NT", 2♠ = 13+ 4 card support, 3♠ = mini-splinter in unspecified minor, 4♠ = ace asking in hearts. After heart agreement, 3♠ = serious/non-serious 3NT. If partner bids spades over my 1NT I will be delighted the play is in the 5-3 fit in dummy's long suit, rather than a 5-3 fit in declarer's. With Gazzilli. this hand is strong enough for a "positive 2♦" over 2♣. Incidentally, using these meanings for spades, for us the sequence 1♥ 1NT, 'something' 2♠ is 6 card 11+, because the sequence 1♥ 1♠, 'something' 2♠ is 6 card 6-10. Useful to have 2 ways to bid 2♠.

Perhaps it should not be ignored. Certainly with this hand a spade lead would not be a disaster, but I was thinking your method would have the same sequence when responder had ♠ xx ♥ KJTx ♦ KQxxx ♣ xx to take an extreme case, and here a spade lead would not be a good start for you when opener has a doubleton. I apologise if I have misunderstood. While this is a criticism - and see also my other post with more reasons - it is intended to be constructive and I do believe in being honest and not saying "this has merit" when I don't mean it. There are many ways of bidding, and it is a matter of choice, but in my view some methods are appreciably worse than others.

I dislike the inability to play in 2M if you have found a 4-4 fit. I dislike responder playing the 4-4 major fit. (note 1) I dislike the idea of opener showing doubleton spades when responder has not shown spade length. (note 2) Note 1 : If you invert responder's major bids, as you suggest, I don't think you can find a heart fit unless GF. Note 2 : When responder has shown 4+ but unknown spade length, it is different.

No, this will never be adopted by anyone. Having different methods for each major makes it too complicated.

There's a snag here. What do I do when on lead and I am void in spades?

While you are fully entitled to bid as you wish, the precept here is to take the OP as stated, and if you had adopted the OP style so far where the bids mean as clearly given, what would you do from here on? Personally, I prefer a 2♣ bid to be game invitational or better with both 4 card majors, but that is not particularly helpful to or germane to this thread.

Neither A nor B. Just a stop inviting a NT game. KT3 would be enough for me.

Just "once a suit is agreed", with one exception of a start of 1♠ 2♠ 3♥. If partner opens a heart, we show spades in preference to showing 3 card heart support, so the reverse is not needed, and in many of the other possible scenarios it could be that the new suit is a cue. A second exception would be converting a game or slam to NT, but never to a different suit. While you may ace ask in partner's suit and then convert to your suit, that would not contravene the rule as you have not previously agreed his suit.

Extremely poor.

4♦ = ace ask in clubs with singleton heart 4♥ = ace ask in self-agreed diamonds 4♠ = 5 card NF but obviously highly suggestive 4NT = ace ask in clubs with void heart 5♣/♦ to play, minimum, not overloaded in AKs 5♥ = slam forcing asking for stop for NT 5♠ = pick a slam in ♦ or ♠ (shows 5 if 3♣ is expected to deny 4 spades) 5NT = heart stop, ace asking for NT. I am assuming 3♠ showed the original GF and 3♦ woould be the original weak diamonds.

It's as I play too, but you do need to have an understanding or agreement of what "a natural raise" is. We define a transfer to 2♠ as being the same as an uninterrupted 1♠ 2♠ after adding on the hcp by which you have agreed an overcall could be weaker than an opening, so with two partners where an overcall may be 2 points fewer than an opening, the transfer support is 3 card 9-12, and the direct raise is 3 card weaker than that. Even so, you still have the decision to make on the 2♣ bid. I see no reason why you could not have 2♣ (non-jump bids beneath the opening suit) as non-forcing, and where you are forcing have those hands jump suit, replacing the otherwise use of fit jumps in those suit(s).

This is a concept I don't understand. LHO has opened. Partner has overcalled on perhaps not much. Responder has passed, so he has nothing, and you think you are not likely to want to force? Given the knowns, an opening hand opposite a pass, how the strength is shared between you and your partner makes little difference, that difference being only positional, so it is neither less important nor more important in my view. Transfer replies to an overcall (Rubens) work best, because half the time you can play transfers as either weak or strong. However, in this OP scenario where my suit is lower ranking that opponent's, I do have to come down on one side or the other. Forcing for me, but no one method fits all hands.

Maybe they don't overcall much where you play. Certainly happens to me. A sensible question, and I like mgoetze's suggestion. I have no better.

Without discussion, I would assume forcing, regardless of the minimum strength of the overcall, as the weaker that may be the more you want a forcing bid when RHO passes.

I would have thought that talking to these "good players" would give you the answers, as they must have come across the situation and resolved it. I have never played it, but I would imagine that after an unopposed 1♣ 1♦ 1M they employ an artificial 2♣ and possibly 2♦ with invitational or better hands, and if you want a parallel with xyz then there is no reason why you could not do so.

Apologies, I did miss the 2♥ overcall. As partner has hearts, he knows I won't have much if anything there, so I must have some values in clubs for my strong 3♦ bid, and he would take a view on whether to bid 3NT or pass. 1♦ (p) 1♠ (2♥) 3♦ (p) "pass or 3NT" In his shoes I would pass, not knowing of the richness in top tricks. So in answer to kgr, we fail too.

What I meant was that if I had a 17+ x4x6 shape I would make a natural reverse of 2♥. I would also bid 2♥ with a balanced 19 count. Partner bids the 2♠ relay, and with the balanced hand I bid 2NT and all normal from there - game, slam, minors or whatever. However, with the reversing hand I bid 3♣ over his 2♠ which tells partner the shape, even though I know there is no chance of a heart fit. This allows him to make a better judgement of whether his holdings are suitable for a NT contract. If not, we play in clubs at some level.

Simple methods : 1♦ 1♠, 3♦(6 card, 18+, denies 4 card major) 3♥, 3NT

I have played this for years and if you do have a sequence where opener needs to rebid 1NT with 12-14 and 2NT with 17+, I think you need something funny to split the 19 off from 17/18. My sequence is when responder has denied a 4 card major, so I treat the reverse in hearts - 1♣ - reply - 2♥ as a sort of Kokish demanding 2♠ from partner. Now 2NT is the 19 hand, with normal continuations, while 3♣ shows the strong x4x6 shape.

If you are opening 1♠ on a 10 count, then perhaps you should consider raising your requirements for a 2/1 so that a "strong" responder is more than 16, as it needs 14+ for a 2/1?

About time you learnt the language then! Playing bridge in it can help.

Agree with helene-t's both posts. Never penalty double, and pass if this hand is not covered by your artificial double.

Some play this way, but others prefer that a support double shows one short of what is expected for a real support bid at that level. Take your example a level higher : 1♣ (1♥) X! (3♥) and now X would show 4 card support on the basis that you would want a 9 card fit to compete to the 3-level over their pre-empt in a lower ranking suit. Responder has the option of passing for penalty. Swap the majors, and if your response is 1NT to show 4/5 hearts over a spade overcall, after 1♣ (1♠) 1NT! (2♠), double from opener in this method would again be 3 card support, because with 4-card support you would want to bid 3♥ as your suit is lower ranking.